PDA

View Full Version : Utah Considers Return to Gold, Silver Coins



OnePimpTiger
03-03-2011, 10:23 PM
Utah Considers Return to Gold, Silver Coins (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/03/utah-considers-return-gold-silver-coins/)


The Utah House was to vote as early as Thursday on legislation that would recognize gold and silver coins issued by the federal government as legal currency in the state. The coins would not replace the current paper currency but would be used and accepted voluntarily as an alternative.

The legislation, which has 12 co-sponsors, would let Utahans pay their taxes with gold and also calls for a committee to study alternative currencies for the state. It would also exempt the sale of gold from the state capital gains tax...

...Critics of the gold standard say it limits countries' control over its monetary policy and leaves them vulnerable to financial shocks, such as the Great Depression. But supporters argue that the current financial system's dependence on the Federal Reserve exposes the value of U.S. money to the threat of inflation.

About time. Allowing the government to print however much money they deem necessary is a ludicrous idea to begin with. We've seen how good the government is with money. I would say the bolded part should be an argument for the gold standard, not against it.

duane1969
03-04-2011, 07:31 PM
Unfortunately there isn't enough gold and silver in the world to support the U.S. economy.

OnePimpTiger
03-04-2011, 10:46 PM
also calls for a committee to study alternative currencies for the state

It doesn't have to be gold and/or silver exclusively, but link the dollar to something with intrinsic value. Letting the Fed decide how much it is worth is no good.

duane1969
03-04-2011, 11:03 PM
I think we would be just fine if we could get beyond being the world's big brother. We are either spening billions defending someone, spending billions feeding someone or spending billions helping someone rebuild after a war or natural disaster. i think it is time we start investing in our own country instead of everyone else's.

Hairylemon
03-05-2011, 01:11 PM
You wouldn't need to keep rebuilding countries if you stopped invading them on flimsy evidence. The same goes for the UK before anyone gets their panties in a bunch.

duane1969
03-05-2011, 05:34 PM
We invaded Iraq as part of a coalition (that included your country). A lot of people conveniently forget that fact but it remains a fact nonetheless.

What other countries have we invaded based on flimsy evidence?

INTIMADATOR2007
03-05-2011, 10:31 PM
I think we would be just fine if we could get beyond being the world's big brother. We are either spening billions defending someone, spending billions feeding someone or spending billions helping someone rebuild after a war or natural disaster. i think it is time we start investing in our own country instead of everyone else's.
Well said !

habsheaven
03-06-2011, 04:57 PM
We invaded Iraq as part of a coalition (that included your country). A lot of people conveniently forget that fact but it remains a fact nonetheless.

What other countries have we invaded based on flimsy evidence?

Not a fact for my country. We knew better than to get involved in that sham called a war in Iraq. And frankly, with the exception of some of the charity, the US only gets involved to "protect its own interests" around the world. I wouldn't call it "being big brother" unless you are referring to that "bossy, thinks he's Dad" big brother some off us grew up with.

limitedplay50
03-06-2011, 05:08 PM
Unfortunately there isn't enough gold and silver in the world to support the U.S. economy.



there is more than enough. In fact if there were only one ounce of gold then that one ounce would be of equal value to the entire world's GDP. Not rocket science here. The amount is of little importance.
The thing that makes it volatile is how to equate future discoveries. If you have a gold standard and a 10 million ounce discovery is made this would drastically decrease the value of the new currency.

Too little of it is doesn't really matter. The problem is how to regulate the circulation of new discoveries.

limitedplay50
03-06-2011, 05:11 PM
Unfortunately there isn't enough gold and silver in the world to support the U.S. economy.



also you would still use paper or possibly electronic. But the value of the paper would be backed by gold. Right now it's just a fiat disaster. Perfect storm looking for a needle to pop it's bubble.
I will take a gold/silver backed currency before an electronic global currency. Which I have to say is not far off. I see it in 2011, the trains conductor seems dead set on continuing this path until we drive right over the cliff.

duane1969
03-07-2011, 12:35 PM
Not a fact for my country. We knew better than to get involved in that sham called a war in Iraq. And frankly, with the exception of some of the charity, the US only gets involved to "protect its own interests" around the world. I wouldn't call it "being big brother" unless you are referring to that "bossy, thinks he's Dad" big brother some off us grew up with.

Yeah, you guys sat home until the heavy work was done then rode in to declare yourself the "helpers" and trained their police.

By the way, our interest are your interest. As the USA goes, so goes Canada. If we pay $20 a gallon for gas, so do you. If we struggle, you struggle. If we protect our interest, we are protecting your interest too.

So while you guys were "smart enough" to stay out of it, you still benefitted from it as did every other country that likes to criticize the US for their involvement.

sanfran22
03-07-2011, 05:58 PM
Yeah, you guys sat home until the heavy work was done then rode in to declare yourself the "helpers" and trained their police.

By the way, our interest are your interest. As the USA goes, so goes Canada. If we pay $20 a gallon for gas, so do you. If we struggle, you struggle. If we protect our interest, we are protecting your interest too.

So while you guys were "smart enough" to stay out of it, you still benefitted from it as did every other country that likes to criticize the US for their involvement.
There's a reason why they are part french......:sign0020::smash:

ReimerFan
03-20-2011, 06:48 PM
Usually don't get involved in politics (or religion) but I have to say I like that when it first happened I could not believe that Canada didn't just on board to invade Iraq, in hindsight I am very glad we didn't. The loss of life on all sides has been far too great, with still no end in sight. For each person killed on each side it self perpetuates more hate and violence. I would much rather see military forces supporting uprisings, such as Libya, rather then starting a war.

As for Canada being in bed with the states as far as our economy goes you are our largest trading partner. Even though we are becoming more globally diverse when your economy suffers so does ours. The difference being that our suffering is a bi-product of yours and for once not self inflicted. What we have going for us right now is an enormous amount of natural resources. When the price of gas goes up so does our dollar.

There is no winning a war in the Middle east. You can hope for more positive outcomes then those you had before you went but that's about it. Not meant to flame any fires, just speaking my 2 cents.

duane1969
03-20-2011, 07:10 PM
Usually don't get involved in politics (or religion) but I have to say I like that when it first happened I could not believe that Canada didn't just on board to invade Iraq, in hindsight I am very glad we didn't. The loss of life on all sides has been far too great, with still no end in sight. For each person killed on each side it self perpetuates more hate and violence. I would much rather see military forces supporting uprisings, such as Libya, rather then starting a war.

So you support civilians with sticks and rocks fighting trained military who are using assault rifles and rocket launchers rather than military vs. military?

As testament to how futile uprisings are, the death toll to date in Libya has surpassed 6000 (as of March 4, it is probably higher by now). The death toll in Iraq from 2003 to current is less than 4500. Seems to me that war is less deadly than revolt.



As for Canada being in bed with the states as far as our economy goes you are our largest trading partner. Even though we are becoming more globally diverse when your economy suffers so does ours. The difference being that our suffering is a bi-product of yours and for once not self inflicted. What we have going for us right now is an enormous amount of natural resources. When the price of gas goes up so does our dollar.

As it stands now, our economy and the global economy is suffering because of the cost of fuel. Our economy was rocking until Katrina gave the gas companies an excuse to jack the price of a gallon of gas. Now, just as our economy might have a chace to rebound, the gas companies are again using turmoil as an excuse to raise prices. At the height of Katrina gas prices I was paying $4.07 a gallon, today I paid $3.69.


There is no winning a war in the Middle east. You can hope for more positive outcomes then those you had before you went but that's about it. Not meant to flame any fires, just speaking my 2 cents.

I couldn't agree more. There is no winning in the Middle East. There has been war in the region for centuries and as long as the same groups remain in power there will continue to be war.

How do you get those in power out of power? There is where opinions divide although I think it is pretty obvious that the ways of the last decade or two are not doing it. Conquering them and then trying to be their friend doesn't work. You can't be the enemy and an ally at the same time.

ReimerFan
03-20-2011, 07:25 PM
So you support civilians with sticks and rocks fighting trained military who are using assault rifles and rocket launchers rather than military vs. military?

As testament to how futile uprisings are, the death toll to date in Libya has surpassed 6000 (as of March 4, it is probably higher by now). The death toll in Iraq from 2003 to current is less than 4500. Seems to me that war is less deadly than revolt.


I was talking about European and North American troops going into Libya to support the civilians, not letting them fight themselves. I would rather see us help people who want the help. As far as death tolls, you are only taking into consideration the coalitions losses, which are severe. If you accounted for the total loss of life, Iraq beats Libya many many times over.



As it stands now, our economy and the global economy is suffering because of the cost of fuel. Our economy was rocking until Katrina gave the gas companies an excuse to jack the price of a gallon of gas. Now, just as our economy might have a chace to rebound, the gas companies are again using turmoil as an excuse to raise prices. At the height of Katrina gas prices I was paying $4.07 a gallon, today I paid $3.69.


Gas is a large factor but the tanking of the economy had much more to do with high risk mortgages and extremely risky unregulated investment policies. Your military accounts for a vast amount of your resources too. If you didn't have mortgage crisis/on-going wars your economy would be in a much better place.



I couldn't agree more. There is no winning in the Middle East. There has been war in the region for centuries and as long as the same groups remain in power there will continue to be war.

How do you get those in power out of power? There is where opinions divide although I think it is pretty obvious that the ways of the last decade or two are not doing it. Conquering them and then trying to be their friend doesn't work. You can't be the enemy and an ally at the same time.

Indeed, the people have to want it enough to do it themselves. No invading force has truly succeeded. The way I look at it every civilization or country goes through their growing pains. Each has paid a price for Democracy in their own way. It cannot be forced upon a population, they must want it, be willing to fight for it and if need be die for it. That is where I feel Libya is right now. We can help them, but not do it for them.

duane1969
03-21-2011, 08:23 AM
Gas is a large factor but the tanking of the economy had much more to do with high risk mortgages and extremely risky unregulated investment policies. Your military accounts for a vast amount of your resources too. If you didn't have mortgage crisis/on-going wars your economy would be in a much better place.

Bad mortgages and military actions are not causing rising cost of business, increased food prices and the decline of the value of the dollar.

The mortgage issue is a result of the declining economy, not the cause. Had the economy continued to improve then people would have kept their jobs and been able to meet their mortgage payment. The talking heads in the media like to say that it is because of loan companies giving loans to people who can't afford it but the reality is that many, many people are losing their homes because they lost their job.

Military needs are paid for by tax dollars so while it may be adding to the deficit it is not causing a struggling economy. In fact, typically war is good for the economy, not bad.